* Ernst, Eric (eric.ernst@intel.com) wrote:

After discussion this morning in the architecture committee meeting, we agreed to proceed and approve the virtio-fs proposal.

Great; sorry I coudln't make it to that call.

One of the open concerns was around formal verification and pen-testing of this new feature. *Stefan et al* - we’d like to have a discussion on planned work in this space. We consider this a gaiting item for moving this feature enabling out of experimental.

Yep that makes sense. Stefan has been doing a bunch of work auditing a bunch of paths in the daemon and adding more checks; those should be in our next release.

When you say 'formal verification' - is this static analysis or something else?

Dave

Thanks, Eric

From: Eric Ernst eric.ernst@intel.com Date: Monday, April 1, 2019 at 8:54 PM To: "kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io" kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io Subject: Experimental virtio-fs proposal for Kata - call for feedback and approval from AC

Hey Kata-kats,

I walked through the proposal for adding experimental support for virtio-fs (as a replacement for 9pfs), and think it is in good enough shape to request feedback and approval from the architecture committee and other Kata stakeholders. I worked with Sebastien to clarify and or address all the prior comments/feedback.

Please take a look and provide feedback if you have any concerns. I’m happy with LGTM on the ML, otherwise let’s discuss in the architecture committee on Tuesday (today, or tomorrow, depending where you live ☺).

In other topics – who still needs to sign up for the PTG?

Thanks, Eric

Proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oc467vctWcxcfzuoXWCFnjPrLXTbDfJzVv67HbGA...

Arch call on Tuesday: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/katacontainers-2019-architecture-committee-...

---

kata-dev mailing list kata-dev@lists.katacontainers.io http://lists.katacontainers.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kata-dev

-- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK